Then let me show you the highlight of the entire game (spoilers) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9J45iyHkkbM
How bad graphics needs to be before you can't tolerate it?
- Thread starter Cute Dragon Here
- Start date
Then let me show you the highlight of the entire game (spoilers) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9J45iyHkkbM
Jrpgfanatic
Member
To this day I continue to play games from generations as far back as the 8-bit era. I've never been one to drop the previous generation like a rock as soon as the next comes out, so I tend to have less of an expectation as to how games 'should look'. This is likely also why I tend not to get too hung up on stuff like frame rates, screen tearing, and PC vs. Console graphic/performance debates.
Overall though, I find the fifth console generation to be the most esthetically jarring to look back at. This of course would be consoles like Saturn, PSX, and N64. In my opinion the jump the 3D just happened too early and the limitations of the technology really show.
Overall though, I find the fifth console generation to be the most esthetically jarring to look back at. This of course would be consoles like Saturn, PSX, and N64. In my opinion the jump the 3D just happened too early and the limitations of the technology really show.
Substandard
Member
I'll play pretty much anything, and the graphics don't really bother me too much as long as I can see what is going on (there are some Atari / Early PC games where this is not the case).
In particularly I really like the SNES 2d sprites and I think a lot of PS2 games still look great, particularly if you up-rez them.
That being said, there are a lot of early 3d games from the PS1 era that are really, really rough to go back to these days. I loved the system at the time, but it has definitely not aged all that well.
In particularly I really like the SNES 2d sprites and I think a lot of PS2 games still look great, particularly if you up-rez them.
That being said, there are a lot of early 3d games from the PS1 era that are really, really rough to go back to these days. I loved the system at the time, but it has definitely not aged all that well.
ViewtifulJC
Banned
I just can't stand any of that PS1-era early 3d. So fuckin' terrible
TheDeadHeroAlistair
Member
Like a few others, I can take crappy graphics if the art style is good, the framerate is good and somewhat constant, and there is no screen tearing. One thing that I'd like to add, even though it more falls under the "art style" category, is cohesion. I like my games to be visually cohesive. It doesn't matter if the artstyle is good. It also doesn't matter if the graphics suddenly become amazing at the second half of the game. If it's not cohesive and there's no reasoning behind it, I can't stand it.
Graphics don't improve gameplay and they don't hurt gameplay.
Graphics is nothing but icing on a cake, i am more interested in the actual cake part, not the frosting. And i can sit here and say without a shadow of a doubt there has never been a game that had graphics impact the gameplay for me.
McBradders
NeoGAF: my new HOME
Art direction is everything.
NES onward of course, I think there is still value in Atari 2600 games, yet I don't particularly care for the art direction of something like VVVVVVVVVVVVV.
I 'unno.
NES onward of course, I think there is still value in Atari 2600 games, yet I don't particularly care for the art direction of something like VVVVVVVVVVVVV.
I 'unno.
Winterfang
Banned
Ugly characters models are a big one, for example the original Bioshock. While the little girls looked creepy in a cartoony way, the enemies and antagonists look like the forgot how people are supposed to look.
Besides that the only two cases I felt insulted where the CGI in Sonic Generations, really pixilated, which left a bad taste in my mouth. Because Sega makes some of the best full motion videos.
The only one that was so bad that it made the game less fun for me was Pokemon White. 2.5D done in the worse possible way. Pixels never looked so ugly, ensure that every creature will look like ass. The over world also was terrible looking. I wouldn't mind any of that If I. Didn't knew that the DS can do much better and Pokemon games made that much money.
Besides that the only two cases I felt insulted where the CGI in Sonic Generations, really pixilated, which left a bad taste in my mouth. Because Sega makes some of the best full motion videos.
The only one that was so bad that it made the game less fun for me was Pokemon White. 2.5D done in the worse possible way. Pixels never looked so ugly, ensure that every creature will look like ass. The over world also was terrible looking. I wouldn't mind any of that If I. Didn't knew that the DS can do much better and Pokemon games made that much money.
BigTnaples
Todd Howard's Secret GAF Account
Depends on the game. Finally bought FF7 when it launched for Vita, but I'm not very far into it due to two reasons.
One being the lack of analogue control. And two being the graphics are appalling.
FF8 however still looks graphically playable to me. As does most any 2D game. Just certain 3D games have aged really really bad.
One being the lack of analogue control. And two being the graphics are appalling.
FF8 however still looks graphically playable to me. As does most any 2D game. Just certain 3D games have aged really really bad.
Albino_Samurai
Member
Don't mind the occasional jaggy, or a dropdown in framerate...but i fucking hate pop-ups!
"Something from nothing" is something i can believe in, but pop-ups in videogames?
Points deducted!
"Something from nothing" is something i can believe in, but pop-ups in videogames?
Points deducted!
2D Games
I have absolutely no problem returning to any post-VCS era 2D game. Pre-NES/Master System games are out of the question for me, though.
3D Games
I can't stand PS1/N64 era 3D graphics anymore (at least not on native hardware), they are absolutely horrible. I have no problem returning to 5th gen games via emulation, though.
I have absolutely no problem returning to any post-VCS era 2D game. Pre-NES/Master System games are out of the question for me, though.
3D Games
I can't stand PS1/N64 era 3D graphics anymore (at least not on native hardware), they are absolutely horrible. I have no problem returning to 5th gen games via emulation, though.
McBradders
NeoGAF: my new HOME
Yes they do and yes they do.
More lately than in the past.
McBradders
NeoGAF: my new HOME
'tis neither here nor there, graphics are incredibly important at communicating gameplay, get that wrong and you can muddy and obscure even the loveliest of mechanics.
You couldn't be MORE wrong.
TheContact
Member
I can do SNES standards and above. 8bit and everything below that I don't think I could get into.
God damn, how did you deal with any other generation? The Call of Duty games on consoles today all run at much higher resolutions than virtually every single other console game from previous generations and back.
Modern display technology is as much to blame for this than anything else. Load up Black Ops 2 on an older CRT and you'd be amazed at how sharp it looks.
The only thing that actually bothers me is a really terrible framerate in a game where it matters. For example, some Halo 4 maps have really shitty framerate when playing splitscreen multiplayer. Since this actually makes it harder to aim it really annoys me.
I've never noticed screen tearing unless I'm specifically looking for it, and don't understand how it can be such a deal breaker for folks.
I've never noticed screen tearing unless I'm specifically looking for it, and don't understand how it can be such a deal breaker for folks.
For me, its all about expectations. If I am aware a game is lacking graphically I tend to be more accepting.
My breaking point was popping in Phantasy Star Zero the for DS, I LOVE Phantasy Star, but that game was garbage to look at. It also didn't help that all the characters looked like they were 12 years old.
My breaking point was popping in Phantasy Star Zero the for DS, I LOVE Phantasy Star, but that game was garbage to look at. It also didn't help that all the characters looked like they were 12 years old.
Count Snackula
Banned
If it has an anime Moe artstyle graphics im out. I cant tolerate it. Feels creepy for an old ass man to be playing with big eyed cartoon children. Its the reason i will not play Recettear: An Item Shop's Tale or stuff like it.
If its technical I can deal with anything except 3DO era graphics with a framerate in the teens.
If its technical I can deal with anything except 3DO era graphics with a framerate in the teens.
BigTnaples
Todd Howard's Secret GAF Account
The Silver
Member
FF7 horrible lego graphics is my limit.
Mainly because of what you said. I played previous gen games on SD displays.
Admittedly I make it worse for myself by often playing console games on my monitor. Pretty darn awful.
I'm currently working my way through Dragon's Dogma which looks like absolute shit, but it's so fun that I don't care one bit. So I guess it's a sliding scale where graphics shittiness works relative to game goodness.
But if it counts for anything, I always hated Morrowind and Oblivion for their absolutely horrific animations (thug-lean walking animation in Morrowind, NO FUCKING DIAGONAL MOVEMENT ANIMATION WHOOPDY SLIDERS EVERYBODY, etc), but like DragDog, Morrowind made it hard to care for how fun it was. Oblivion... not so much. At least Skyrim was a step in the right direction visually, and in all fairness, was more fun than Oblivion by a wide margin. But if we could capture the visual fidelity of Skryim and the design of Morrowind... hot damn.
But if it counts for anything, I always hated Morrowind and Oblivion for their absolutely horrific animations (thug-lean walking animation in Morrowind, NO FUCKING DIAGONAL MOVEMENT ANIMATION WHOOPDY SLIDERS EVERYBODY, etc), but like DragDog, Morrowind made it hard to care for how fun it was. Oblivion... not so much. At least Skyrim was a step in the right direction visually, and in all fairness, was more fun than Oblivion by a wide margin. But if we could capture the visual fidelity of Skryim and the design of Morrowind... hot damn.
SuperEpicGuy
Banned
Well if it's in 2d I sometimes tend to not want to try those games out unless they get 9's or 10's. Minecraft would be an example of a game as I tried to enjoy it but the completely ugly square blocks (even with 2k texture pack) take all immersion out completely.
I can play pretty much anything. Graphics only matter for the first 10 minutes, once you get into the game it doesn't matter what it looks like. Visibility matters of course, if you can't tell what's going on it's going to negatively affect the game. But new games with flashier graphic don't necessarily have better visibility. Many of today's game have so little contrast and so much junk cluttering up the screen, it's actually harder to tell what's going on than it was back in the PS1 days.
Play Driver 1 and 2 on the Playstation, and then try to tell me that the game wouldn't be better if buildings didn't pop in like 10 feet in front of you.
It depends. I can live with poor visuals if a game is good. Poor framerate is an other matter entirely (couldn't play through Shadow of the Colossus, for example).
That being said, good art, good IQ, and a good looking game in general will be much more enjoyable. Playing Dark Souls at 2160p downsampled...I was in awe of its beauty throughout the game.
That being said, good art, good IQ, and a good looking game in general will be much more enjoyable. Playing Dark Souls at 2160p downsampled...I was in awe of its beauty throughout the game.
I think what smr00 and other "graphics don't matter" people mean to say is that graphics don't matter as long as they don't interfere with more important parts of the game. Severe pop-up is an example of visuals failing to support a basic function of the game due to technical limitations. It would be a different story if the game was designed around the player having that kind of limited visibility, but my memory of the Driver series is fuzzy and it doesn't sound like that was the case.
So graphics don't matter, except for when they do.
Evolution_1ne
Banned
this generation first batch of games is as low as I will go
I think graphics matter as much as they affect the mechanics. A low framerate is more problematic for an action game than a turn-based strategy game because the former relies on reflexes while the latter does not. Blurry textures are problematic if they prevent the player from recognizing objects, surfaces, or characters that are supposed to be distinguishable from each other at a glance. Compression artifacts in FMV look ugly, but they're generally a problem for the game unless they obscure things that the player is expected to notice. Get my drift?
Similar threads
- Locked